HONOURABLE Justice B.O. Quadri of the Federal High Court sitting in
Port Harcourt on Wednesday in adjudication of the suit filed by six law
graduates of the National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) and several others
against the Council of Legal Education (CLE), Attorney General of the
Federation (AGF), National Universities Commission (NUC) and alma mater, NOUN
listened to the arguments of the parties.
The plaintiffs; Messrs. Aaaron George
Chituru, Eric Onyenuforo, Okafor Joseph, Magnus Amadi, Obi Raphael, Ogoloma
Darlinton Bekwele are praying the court to declare that the arbitrary refusal
of the CLE and three other defendants to admit them alongside other law
graduates of the federal government-owned university into the Nigerian Law
School (NLS) despite its accreditation and approval by the statutorily approved
bodies are unfounded and inconsistent with the principles of law, and therefore
prayed the court to compel the defendants to admit them forthwith.
Leading counsel to the plaintiffs,
Professor Amuda Kannike (SAN) argued that NOUN was established by an Act of the
National Assembly, and evidently accredited by NUC and approved by the federal
government as required in law to admit and award law degrees which it conferred
to the plaintiffs, and therefore met all the legal requirements for admission
to the Law school without hitches. The learned silk pointed out in his
arguments that in nowhere in the CLE Act did any provisions confer the powers
the body is exercising, and therefore submitted that its actions against NOUN
law graduates are indicative of animosity recalling that when some universities
in the country were running evening law programme which had no legal backing
and protection of any sort, the same CLE knowingly admitted all its graduates into
the NLS for the vocational training prior to liaising with NUC for the stoppage
of the programme but NOUN that is at the moment legally fit, approved and recognized
as long of laws of the federation are concerned, is snubbed and rejected.
He further contended that the CLE had
skillfully attempted to amend the CLE Act overnight to pave way for it to have absolute
powers on eligibility of universities to offer law degrees in the heat of its
refusal to admit NOUN law graduates but was thrown out by the Senate, and
therefore questioned its powers to go ahead with its refusal since its wishes
to exercise absolute powers didn’t see the light of the day as sought in the
bill. Professor Amuda therefore urged the court to give judgment in favour of
the plaintiffs stating that the refusal to admit them into Law School is not
backed up by any law but dictatorial and malicious adding that the treatment
meted out to NOUN law graduates by CLE by allowing them parading the streets
with law degrees that cannot add any values to their lives is wicked and
inhumanity to man.
On the other hand, counsel to CLE, Dr. E.C. Ukala (SAN) argued that admittedly, the NUC is solely responsible for accreditation of all
university programmes including Law, however, the Council as the professional
body cannot sit and allow the profession being taking to the mud, hence its refusal
to admit NOUN was anchored on its passion to protect the profession. He added
that the council was convinced that NUC erred in its accreditation based on procedural
defects in NOUN mode of operations. In his submission, he prayed the court to
strike out the originating summon by the plaintiffs in the interest of the
profession. The counsel to the AGF however didn’t put arguments but urged the
court to adopt its written position in place of oral arguments.
Present at the court were the
plaintiffs, the National Coordinator of Law Graduates Forum (LGF), Hon. Carl Umegboro,
other graduates and some members of LAWSAN Progressives Forum; an umbrella of
NOUN Law Students led by Mr. Uchenna Lasbery Nduwuba.
After listening to all parties, Justice Quadri adjourned the
court to 27 January 2017 for judgment.
No comments:
Post a Comment